Rousseau and “God of Carnage”

Broadway poster for God of Carnage, found here

A few years ago while in New York, I saw the Broadway play "God of Carnage" written by Yasmina Reza. While reviewing Rousseau’s “Discourse on Inequality”, I realized that the play demonstrated many of Rousseau’s principles. The plot of the play follows two Brooklyn families who meet to resolve a fight between their two sons. The fight, which is not shown on-stage involves one boy who attacks another boy with a stick after he says he cannot join his “gang” of friends. The families make small talk and argue about how to handle the situation, along the way discovering their own prejudices. The play represents a clash of natural state with civilized society. After a series of heated arguments, the couples abandon civilized rule as their true feelings surface, reverting to their natural state.

"Carnage" movie trailer l Directed by Roman Polanski, starring Jodi Foster, Kate Winslet, Christoph Waltz and John C. Reilly

State of nature

The carnal nature of the characters in “God of Carnage” reflects Rousseau’s “state of nature” by focusing on the egocentric. Rousseau believes man should live in solitary, loving himself, and possessing reason. He reasons that by living selfishly, and being honest, man will be set free. The play validates this claim because at the end the couples are relieved that they spoke about their problems and could address them in a less civilized manner. But the play also leaves the audience with the unsettling feeling of there being no real solution to the boys’ fight and that society itself is to blame. This also is in line with Rousseau’s theory because he says we can never return to the state of the noble savage once society has been established.

Additionally, the central conflict of the play was the unseen fight between the two families’ children. Ironically, the children here are closer to the state of nature because they are more honest about their feelings than the parents, who dance around the issue afraid of breaking social norms.

Property is unnatural

In Rousseau’s “Discourse on Inequality” he also says that property is the cause for society and consequent unhappiness:

           

“From how many crimes, wars and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows, "Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody."”

Jeff Daniels runs after his on-stage wife Hope Davis in Yasmina Reza’s “God of Carnage" in 2009 opening Broadway performance.

Photo by Sara Krulwich/The New York Times, found here

When humans decided there was property, we decided some were better than others. This message is also clear in “God of Carnage” as the parents in the play are cognizant of the social order of property. The parents of the boy who hit the “gang leader” are incredulous that their son would be excluded from the group (likely because they think they are better because they are wealthier than the other boy’s parents.) These families are also specific to this conflict because they are upper middle class-upper class families with the luxury of a lot of property and the time to spend focusing on their children. Because they are wealthy, the characters have a mentality of protecting their family/property that is part of their culture. If removed from their society, with the stresses of acting a certain way and owning certain things, these characters would be living more fulfilling lives (rendering the play unnecessary.)

"Fashionista Barbie" the epitome of consumer culture
Courtesy of creative commons

Rousseau, contrary to Locke, purports that property is unnatural. As I was contemplating property I began to see instances of this in my own life. When my sister and I would play Barbies we would always fight over whether or not to temporarily share or permanently divide our favorite doll accessories. While I wanted to keep some of my favorite accessories every game, she always wanted to share the toys. As the big sister I explained to her the “rules of ownership,” that once you pick something and say it is yours, no one else can have it. “I have these and you have those, you see?” I had come up with my own rules of property ownership, favoring my wants over those of my younger sister.  Property, Rousseau would explain, causes the bad kind of selfishness. Good selfishness is caring about oneself and loving oneself but also caring about others. Property inspires hate and disgust for neighbors who with have less or more, furthering the bonds of inequality. And it was true with my sister: my rules of Barbie accessories certainly did not endear me to my sister. I had only used the rule for my own benefit. I was not compassionate towards my sister and I extended the equality divide between us. Years later, I realized my sister had learned the lesson I taught her all too well. Now she won’t ever let me borrow her clothes!